Warsi and The Extremism of British Foreign Policy
The sudden resignation of Foreign Office Minister Baroness Sayeeda Warsi has shocked the political establishment. Hitherto Warsi had been a loyal member of the front bench, but even this loyalist had her red lines. The bloody massacre of nearly 2000 people in Gaza (equivalent to 60,000 deaths in the UK), many of them babies, many of them women, many of them elderly not only shocked the entire world, but has now penetrated the heart of the British government. When a hitherto loyalist, describes the government’s policy towards Israel as “morally indefensible” you know your policy is out on the fringes of neo conservative brutality.
The British government’s policy towards Israel hasn’t simply been blind indifference, though that would be bad enough. It hasn’t just provided political cover though that would be bad enough. It doesn’t just provide 8 billion pounds in arms to Israel, though that would be bad enough. No, the real crime is its pathetic intellectual defence of Tel Aviv, while countless women became widows, while hundreds of children became orphans and while a city was literally bombed back to the stone age.
An intellectual defence that cites Hamas rockets as the sole problem in the dispute, ignoring 66 years of a brutal occupation and allows countries like the UK to fight the occupation of the Falkland Islands but denies the Palestinians any such right. An intellectual defence that swallows every Israeli talking point, bar the ones which threaten the Palestinians with more ethnic cleansing.
But what do we expect from a political class that invaded Afghanistan in 2001, who then killed over 100,000 in Iraq in 2003, who allowed Israel to blow up Lebanon in 2006 and blockade Gaza since 2007 and who supports and arm every brutal dictator in the Middle East.
Yet what is most galling is that despite this and the revelations revealed by Edward Snowden, the government with a straight face seeks to preach a set of values to the Muslim community and the wider population. Indeed it was only recently in the aftermath of the Trojan Horse affair, that the British Prime Minister discussed the importance of promoting in a muscular fashion British secular values citing freedom, tolerance, upholding the rule of law as core examples.
Obviously Islam opposes secularism and has core values which deliver justice, accountability and economic prosperity, yet a cursory examination of British values shows far from being eternal principles, they are only applied when convenient. Where is the freedom of Palestinians who currently live under a brutal occupation? Where is the tolerance shown towards dead Palestinian babies? Where is the rule of law which punishes Putin but exempts Netanyahu?
Warsi’s resignation is yet another example of the veiled frustrations that exist in the political system soon realising that it is designed only to serve political interests based on a utilitarian ethical system and not to serve or rescue humanity for any moral position. Robin Cook, a British Labour Party politician resigned in protest against the invasion of Iraq in 2003 for another morally indefensible position by the British in the War on Iraq.
British foreign policy is rooted in the oldest of principles, not the Magna Carta, or revered political institutions, but in the extreme value of material self-interest. A self-interest that puts political donations above the deaths of innocent babies, a self-interest that puts political survival above a survival of a city, a self-interest that puts arms deals above core humanity.
Indeed, the Zionist entity was created by Britain in the heartland of the Muslim World not due to a powerful Jewish lobby, but because it was in her political and economic interests to do so in the 20th century imperial climate upon the discovery of necessary resources and the death of two competing powers which included the perishing Ottoman Caliphate. The Zionist entity thus served the continuation of British hegemony over the politically repressed sons of the 1400 year old Caliphate. Although later adopted by the Americans but for similar reasons.
History bears witness to the co-existence of Jews, Christians and Muslims in the very same region under the Shari’ah law that established political stability and social peace for centuries. It is only the same Islamic system that can restore peace in the Middle East ending a decade’s old conflict created by the British. Islam has detailed its stance regarding religious groupings and non-Muslims and has the concept of “ahl udh-dhimmah” (people of the covenant), which carries a moral significance not reflected in the term minorities that institutionalizes ethnic discrimination in secular democratic societies.
The political solution to the Muslim World thus rest in the Islamic solutions alone and not those proposed by a secular narcissistic foreign government such as the two state or one state solutions that seek to legitimise the occupation of Palestine further only to protect her foreign policy interests at the expense of mass genocide of men, women, children and babies.
Is it any wonder that not just Muslims, but many others now question these very values and the grotesque application of these in the Middle East today? What is morally indefensible is not just the British policy which supports Israel’s genocide, but the extreme values of self-interest which lie at the very heart of the British establishment.